Cortisol features prominently in theories describing how chronic stress wears away at physical and cognitive health. The current study examines composite measures of physiological and cognitive functioning in relation to two aspects of daily cortisol: total daily output and change in levels throughout the day. Participants (N = 1001; aged 28-84 years-old) from the Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS) study provided 4 daily saliva samples across four consecutive days and underwent a physical exam that provided information about six inter-related physiological systems that were combined into a measure of allostatic load. They also completed a phone-based battery of cognitive tasks, which provided a composite score combining memory, reasoning, and speed of processing performance. Total daily cortisol output was captured using area under the curve with respect to ground (AUCg). Change in cortisol levels was assessed using two methods: slope, calculated through piecewise spline models, and dynamic range, calculated by the difference between the day's highest and lowest log-cortisol levels. Findings indicate that, when examined together, overall cortisol output was not associated with either outcome, but a greater range in cortisol throughout the day was associated with both lower allostatic load and higher cognitive functioning. Results emphasize the importance of dynamic daily processes, assessed either using slopes or dynamic range, to both physiological and cognitive functioning.

The current study examined whether commonly observed age differences in affective experience among community samples of healthy adults would generalize to a group of adults who live with significant functional disability. Age differences in daily affect and affective reactivity to daily stressors among a sample of participants with spinal cord injury (SCI) were compared with a noninjured sample. Results revealed that patterns of affective experience varied by sample. Among noninjured adults, older age was associated with lower levels of daily negative affect, higher levels of daily positive affect, and less negative affective reactivity in response to daily stressors. In contrast, among the sample with SCI, no age differences emerged. Findings, which support the model of Strength and Vulnerability Integration, underscore the importance of taking life context into account when predicting age differences in affective well-being.

Objective

Older adults often appraise and remember events less negatively than younger adults. These tendencies may influence reports that rely more on nonexperiential, reconstructive processes. As such, the current study examined whether age differences may be more pronounced for reports of emotions that span across increasingly longer temporal epochs compared to reports of more proximal emotional experiences.

Method

Participants (aged 25-74 during Burst 1) from the Midlife in the United States Survey and the National Study of Daily Experiences reported the negative affect they experienced across a month, a week, and throughout the day at two measurement bursts 10 years apart.

Results

Across all negative affect measures, older age was related to lower levels of negative affect. The effect of age, however, varied across the three temporal epochs, such that age differences were smallest when people reported their daily negative affect and greatest when they reported their monthly negative affect.

Discussion

Taking into account how emotion reports differ based on method provides a more realistic picture of emotional experience in adulthood. Findings suggest that age differences in emotional experiences vary based on whether questions ask about short versus longer time periods. Age advantages are most pronounced when people recall emotions across increasingly longer periods of time.