Cited by 289Aging and Gerontology ResearchResilience and Mental HealthStress Responses and Cortisol

Reported exposure and emotional reactivity to daily stressors: The roles of adult age and global perceived stress.

Open access
Stawski, Robert S., Sliwinski, Martin J., Almeida, David M., Smyth, Joshua M.·2008·Psychology and Aging

Abstract

A central goal of daily stress research is to identify resilience and vulnerability factors associated with exposure and reactivity to daily stressors. The present study examined how age differences and global perceptions of stress relate to exposure and emotional reactivity to daily stressors. Sixty-seven younger (M age = 20) and 116 older (M age = 80) adults completed a daily stress diary and measures of positive and negative affect on 6 days over a 14-day period. Participants also completed a measure of global perceived stress. Results revealed that reported exposure to daily stressors is reduced in old age but that emotional reactivity to daily stressors did not differ between younger and older adults. Global perceived stress was associated with greater reported exposure to daily stressors in older adults and greater stress-related increases in negative affect in younger adults. Furthermore, across days on which daily stressors were reported, intraindividual variability in the number and severity of stressors reported was associated with increased negative affect, but only among younger adults.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0882-7974.23.1.52

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Most studies of intra-individual emotion variability fail to consider gender or attempt to statistically control for it.

    “most studies of intra-individual emotion variability simply fail to consider gender or attempt to statistically “control” for it20–28.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stawski, R. S., Sliwinski, M. J., Almeida, D. M., & Smyth, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • Syracuse University (US)
Venue
Psychology and Aging
Published
2008
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
52-61
ISSN
  • 0882-7974 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1498
OpenAlex
W2148917016
Cited by
289
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 17
FWCI
10.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychology and Aging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (AG12448)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (5T32MH018904)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
Keywords
daily hassles, stress exposure, emotional reactivity, age differences, older adults, resilience, negative affect, positive affect, within-person variability
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Affect, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Arousal, Culture, Emotions, Female, Humans, Individuality, Male, Middle Aged, Personality Inventory, Stress, Psychological

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review