CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 198Nostalgia and Consumer BehaviorIdentity, Memory, and TherapyPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

Nostalgia and well-being in daily life: An ecological validity perspective.

Open access
Newman, David B., Sachs, Matthew E., Stone, Arthur A., Schwarz, Norbert·2020·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
DOI 10.1037/pspp0000236PMC PMC7513922
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Nostalgia is a mixed emotion. Recent empirical research, however, has highlighted positive effects of nostalgia, suggesting it is a predominantly positive emotion. When measured as an individual difference, nostalgia-prone individuals report greater meaning in life and approach temperament. When manipulated in an experimental paradigm, nostalgia increases meaning in life, self-esteem, optimism, and positive affect. These positive effects may result from the specific experimental procedures used and little is known about daily experiences that covary with nostalgia. To address this gap, we aimed to measure nostalgia in ecologically valid contexts. We created and validated the Personal Inventory of Nostalgic Experiences (PINE) scale (Studies 1a-1d) to assess both trait and state-based nostalgic experiences. When measured as an individual difference, the nomological net was generally negative (Study 2). When measured in daily life (Studies 3 and 4), nostalgia as a state variable was negatively related to well-being. Lagged analyses showed that state nostalgia had mixed effects on well-being at a later moment that day and negative effects on well-being on the following day. To reconcile the discrepancies between these studies and the positive effects of nostalgia from previous research, we showed that experimentally induced nostalgic recollections were rated more positively and less negatively than daily experiences of nostalgia (Study 5). These studies show that nostalgia is a mixed emotion; although it may be predominantly positive when nostalgic memories are generated on request, it seems predominantly negative when nostalgia is experienced in the course of everyday life. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pspp0000236

Cites

94 of 95 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Participants in Newman et al.'s Study 5 rated a nostalgic episode experienced in everyday life as far more positive (M = 5.02) than negative (M = 2.47), contradicting the conclusion that nostalgia is predominantly negative in everyday life.

    “participants evaluated it as far more positive ( M = 5.02) than negative ( M = 2.47; Newman etal., Study 5, Table 6, p. 341).”

    From Water From the Lake of Memory: The Regulatory Model of Nostalgia (2023) · cites this paper as Newman et al., 2020

    Study 5’s Measures section confirms that participants rated everyday nostalgic experiences for both positivity and negativity. The Results discuss those ratings, but the passages available from our copy do not give the cited means of 5.02 and 2.47, so the numerical comparison cannot be verified. The paper’s Abstract and Conclusion characterize everyday nostalgia as relatively negative; the claimed contradiction is an interpretation, not a finding the source reports. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Brandstätter H. (2007). The time sampling diary (TSD) of emotional experience in everyday life situations In Allen J. & Coan J. (Eds.), The handbook of emotion elicitation and assessment (pp. 318– 331). New York: Oxford University Press.
  2. Jahoda M, Deutsch M, & Cook SW (1951). Research methods in social relations, with especial reference to prejudice. New York: Dryden Press.
  3. Little TD (2013). Longitudinal structural equation modeling. Guilford Press.
  4. McGrath JE (1982). Dilemmantics: The study of research choices and dilemmas In McGrath JE, Martin J, & Kulka RA (Ed.), Judgment calls in research (pp. 69– 102). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  5. Muthén LK and Muthén BO (1998- 2017). Mplus User’s Guide. Eighth Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén
  6. National Research Council. (2013). Subjective well-being: Measuring happiness, suffering, and other dimensions of experience. (Stone AA & Mackie C, Eds.). Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. 24432436
  7. Schwarz N. (2012). Why researchers should think “real-time”: A cognitive rationale In Mehl MR Conner T (Ed.), Handbook of research methods for studying daily life (pp. 22– 42). New York: Guilford.
  8. Williams EJ (1959). Regression analysis. New York: Wiley.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Newman, D. B., Sachs, M. E., Stone, A. A., & Schwarz, N.
Affiliations
University of Southern California (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2020-02
Volume
118
Issue
2
Pages
325-347
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
DOI
10.1037/pspp0000236
PMC
PMC7513922
OpenAlex
W2913790249
Cited by
198
References
95
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 1
FWCI
20.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (P30AG024928)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Nostalgia and Consumer Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Identity, Memory, and Therapy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
nostalgia, well-being, everyday life, mixed emotions, meaning in life, self-esteem, positive affect, nomological network, ecological validity
MeSH terms
Optimism, Ecological Momentary Assessment, Adult, Affect, Emotions, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Mental Health, Personal Satisfaction, Self Concept, Young Adult

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