Age Differences In Reactivity Research Articles

RECENT ADVANCES IN ASSESSING AGE DIFFERENCES IN AFFECT DYNAMICS

Abstract Affective experiences are inherently dynamic and short-term changes in affect offer important insights into well-being. Changes in the processes underlying affect dynamics, namely, affect reactivity and regulation, are often invoked as explanations for age-related stability or enhancement of well-being. However, previous evidence for age differences in affect dynamics is inconsistent. In this symposium, we leverage theory-based approaches and cutting-edge statistical tools to gain a deeper understanding of how individuals manage daily affect. Wirth and colleagues investigated age differences in affect reactivity and regulation, using a formalized theoretical approach to affect dynamics. Their results indicated complex, multi-directional age differences in reactivity and regulation. Neupert and Graham focused on the idea that perception of time remaining in life plays a key role in age differences in affect dynamics. Feeling closer to death was related to lower positive and higher negative affect. These relations were particularly pronounced in older adults. Wolfe and colleagues investigated age-differential associations between cognitive capacities and affect regulation preferences. Their results indicated that cognitive capacities affected regulation preferences mostly in middle-aged rather than older adults. Mikkelsen and colleagues related affect regulation patterns to well-being in an age-diverse sample. Their findings indicated that older adults exhibit less variation in regulation strategy use and that regulation effectiveness was less important for well-being in older adults. The discussion will center on the value of considering age-related similarities and differences in affect dynamics, age-relevant factors for successful emotion regulation, and the contexts that might influence affect dynamic processes.

Age and extraversion differences in heart rate reactivity during working memory tasks.

Research and theory have shown a link between heart rate reactivity during cognitive testing and extraversion in younger adults; however, similar work has not been conducted with older adults. This study was designed to explore age and extraversion-related differences in within-person heart rate (HR) reactivity during two working memory tasks of varying difficulty using a multi-level modeling approach. Across 570 total within-person assessments of continuous HR monitoring, 28 younger adults (M = 19.76, SD = 1.15) and 29 older adults (M = 71.19, SD = 6.63) were administered two working memory tasks (backward digit span and n-back). There were no age differences in reactivity during the backward digit span. However, similar to previous findings, on the more difficult n-back task, younger adults low in extraversion showed a trend toward higher HR reactivity than young adults high in extraversion. Interestingly, the older adults showed the opposite pattern in that lower extraversion older adults were less reactive than the higher extraversion older adults who showed the steepest increase in HR. The HR increase of the older adults high in extraversion may be an indication of higher engagement in this more difficult task. Individual differences in extraversion need to be taken into account when administering working memory tasks in older adults.

Age differences in reactivity to daily general and Type 1 diabetes stressors.

Older adults often report less exposure to and less affective reactions to daily stressors. However, older adults with a chronic illness such as Type 1 diabetes may experience more daily stressors due to the complications of diabetes and may be more affected by those stressors. The study examined (a) age differences in reported exposure to general and diabetes stressors, (b) whether daily general and diabetes stressors relate to daily positive and negative affect, self-care, and blood glucose, and (c) whether these daily associations are moderated by age and comorbidity. Individuals with Type 1 diabetes (n = 199; 52.3% female, average age 46.81 years) completed a checklist for 14 days reporting general and diabetes stressors. General diabetes distress was assessed with the Diabetes Distress Scale. Daily positive and negative affect and daily self-care behaviors were rated each day. Blood glucose was assessed via glucometers. Older adults reported fewer daily general and diabetes stressors and less diabetes distress compared to younger adults. Multilevel models indicated that both daily general and diabetes stressors (between- and within-person) were associated with lower positive and higher negative affect. Fewer diabetes stressors were associated with better self-care and lower (better) mean blood glucose. Neither age nor comorbidity interacted with general or diabetes stressors to predict any outcome (except one effect for comorbidity), indicating that older adults and those experiencing more comorbid conditions were similarly affected by stressors. Results suggest that older adults experience fewer stressors than younger adults but are similarly affected when stressors do occur. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Supplemental Material for Age Differences in Reactivity to Daily General and Type 1 Diabetes Stressors

Supplemental Material for Age Differences in Reactivity to Daily General and Type 1 Diabetes Stressors

Daily Stressor Forecasts and Anticipatory Coping: Age Differences in Dynamic, Domain-Specific Processes.

We focused on the temporal space before stressor exposure and examined two constructs-daily stressor forecasting and anticipatory coping-for daily emotional well-being. One hundred and seven younger (M age = 19.44, range 18-36) and 116 older (M age = 64.71, range 60-90) participants reported on 1,627 total days via an online daily diary study. Participants reported baseline demographic information (Day 1) and stressor forecasts, anticipatory coping, stressor exposure, and negative affect (Days 2-9). We found significant intraindividual variability in stressor forecasts. Increases in forecasts of upcoming stressors were associated with increases in anticipatory coping of those stressors in some domains. Older adults forecasted more upcoming home stressors than younger adults, but older adults reported less anticipatory coping than younger adults. Finally, we found age differences in emotional reactivity to daily home stressors depending on previous-day forecasts and coping of those home stressors. Forecasting home stressors was associated with a stronger reduction in reactivity for younger adults relative to older adults, but stagnant deliberation coping was associated with increased reactivity for younger adults, not for older adults. Daily stressor forecasts are dynamic and situation-specific and linked to daily anticipatory coping and age differences in reactivity to home stressors.

Chapter 13<BR> Personal Risk and Resilience Factors in the Context of Daily Stress

This chapter focuses on the role that personal risk and resilience factors play as adults of all ages cope with the stressors encountered in everyday life. Theorists have suggested that researchers should focus on the effects of daily stress and coping rather than focusing exclusively on major life events and chronic stress and have proposed that understanding how adults cope with daily stress is a key aspect of understanding long-term well-being and adaptation in adulthood. After presenting a conceptual model outlining the major components of the daily stress process, the chapter reviews the existing empirical literature on personal risk and resilience factors in the context of daily stress. This research clearly suggests that there is no universal generalization that can be made regarding whether chronological age, in and of itself, confers greater vulnerability or resilience onto adults. Instead, we argue that researchers should ask when and under what conditions is age associated with greater vulnerability to daily stress and when and under what conditions is age associated with greater resilience to daily stress. Age differences in reactivity to daily stress are clearly embedded within a complex system of factors-structural, individual, and situational-that influence stress reactivity and stress recovery in several ways. This complexity should not be taken to mean that stress reactivity and recovery cannot be charted or understood. Researchers, however, will need to approach this complexity with a great deal of theoretical, methodological, and statistical rigor to move our understanding of the importance of age in shaping risk and resilience to daily stress forward. The final section of the chapter outlines several directions for future research in the area of aging and resilience. In particular, we argue that a focus on personal risk and resilience factors in the context of daily stress, in combination with the application of sophisticated statistical methods (e.g., dynamic systems modeling), will contribute to a more dynamic and person-centered understanding of processes of resilience.

Age differences in Exposure and Reactivity to Interpersonal Tensions among Black and White Individuals across Adulthood.

The present study examined age differences in exposure and reactivity to interpersonal tensions among White and Black Americans. Participants from the National Study of Daily Experiences II (NSDE II, n= 1696 White and n = 239 Black; ages 34 to 84) reported their experiences of daily interpersonal tensions and well-being (positive and negative affect) over 8 days and provided salivary cortisol samples. A total of 40% of respondents reported having an argument and 62% reported avoiding an argument. Multilevel models estimated separately for Black and White respondents revealed that older people reported fewer interpersonal tensions (i.e., less exposure) than did younger people. However, age differences in reactivity to tensions (e.g., appraisals, coping strategies, implications of tensions for affect and cortisol) varied by race. Although older Black respondents reported tensions were less stressful than younger Black respondents, there were fewer age difference in reactivity to tensions overall among Black respondents compared to White respondents. Findings are consistent with the exposure reactivity model and gerontological theories of emotion regulation but show that the specific age differences vary by race which may indicate unique strengths and vulnerabilities among Whites and Blacks.

Reactivity to daily stressors in adulthood: The importance of stressor type in characterizing risk factors.

This study examined daily stressors in adults ages 18 to 89 years (M = 49.6 years) over 30 days. We examined the role of individual factors (i.e., age, self-concept differentiation [SCD], perceived control) in physical and psychological reactivity to interpersonal, network, home, and health stressors. Findings were consistent with the perspective that adults were less reactive to stress on days during which they felt in control and that younger adults and adults with high SCD were more vulnerable to stress. Age, SCD, and daily perceived control, however, interacted with one another, and findings varied by stressor type. For example, age differences in reactivity were moderated by SCD whereby older adults with low SCD were particularly resilient to home stressors. In addition, whether perceived control buffered adults' reactivity to daily stress varied by age and SCD. For example, only adults with high SCD were psychologically reactive to network stressors and this was the case only on days during which they reported experiencing low control. The findings emphasize the importance of considering the varying ways in which individual characteristics interact to influence stress reactivity to different types of stressors.

Age Differences in Reactivity to Daily Stressors: The Role of Personal Control

We examined age and control belief differences in physical and emotional reactivity to daily stressors in four domains: interpersonal, work, network, and home. We combined data from the National Study of Daily Experiences and the Midlife in the United States survey, resulting in 1,031 participants who reported on 7,229 days. Findings from multilevel models suggest that age and control beliefs play an important role in a person's reactivity to interpersonal, network, and work stressors. Specifically, older age and lower perceived constraints were each related to lower emotional and physical reactivity to interpersonal stressors. High mastery buffered the physical effects of work stressors for younger and older adults, and high mastery was important for middle-aged adults' emotional reactivity to network stressors. High constraint was associated with the strongest physical reactivity to network stressors for younger and older adults.

Long- and short-term affective states in happiness: Age and sex comparisons

Data from 690 persons in three adult age groups were used to evaluate the generality of a componential model of happiness (Kozma et al., 1990). The model postulates that long- and short-term affective states combine in an additive manner to produce current happiness. The short-term components should be more susceptible to environmental manipulation than the long-term ones and should change more readily with an appropriate experimental manipulation. Subscales of the Memorial University Mood Scale (MUMS) were used to assess short-term affect while the experience subscales of the Memorial University of Newfoundland Scale of Happiness (MUNSH) and Diener's Long-term Satisfaction Scale were used to measure long-term affect. Overall current happiness was assessed by a seven-point avowed happiness rating scale. The Velten mood induction procedure was used to manipulate current affective state. In five of six comparisons, changes on short-term components were significantly greater than on long-term components. Age differences in reactivity to mood induction emerged only when a negative induction procedure was followed by a positive one. Under these conditions, the youngest cohort responded more consistently than the oldest cohort. An additive model, based on long- and short-term affect, age, and sex produced the best explanation for current happiness.

THE EFFECTS OF HIGH SPATIAL DENSITY ON HUMOR APPRECIATION: AGE AND SEX DIFFERENCES

The social facilitation of humor appreciation is a widely held belief but narrowly researched concept. This study was designed to show the involvement of spatial density as well as social density in the appreciation of humor. Male and female adolescents representing ages 11 to 18 years participated under conditions of high and low spatial density. High spatial density was found to significantly diminish appreciation of three humor types. Significant sex and age differences in reactivity to spatial density were found. Results expand current knowledge of the effects of density on the appreciation of humor and suggest the capability of spatial density to inhibit positive affect.