Lifespan effects of current age and of age at the time of remembered events on the affective tone of life narrative memories: Early adolescence and older age are more negative.

The affective tone of autobiographical memories may be influenced by age in two ways-by the current age of the remembering individual and by the age of the remembered self at the time of the remembered event. While aging has been associated with more positive autobiographical memories, young adulthood is remembered more positively than other parts of life. We tested whether these effects also show in life story memories and how they act jointly on affective tone; also, we wanted to explore their effects on remembered lifetimes other than early adulthood. We tested effects of current age and age at event on affective tone with brief entire life narratives provided up to five times across 16 years by 172 Germans of both genders, ages 8 to 81 years. Multilevel analyses found an unexpected negativity effect of aging for current age and confirmed a "golden 20s" effect of remembered age. In addition, women told more negative life stories, and affective tone dipped in early adolescence for current age and was remembered as such up to mid-adulthood. Thus, the affective tone of life story memories is jointly influenced by current and remembered age. The absence of a positivity effect in aging is explained by the specific requirements of telling an entire life. We suggest the turmoil of puberty as a reason for the early adolescence dip. Gender differences are potentially explained by differences in narrative style, in depression rates, and in real-life challenges.

Standard setting anchor statements: a double cross-over trial of two different methods.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Context: We challenge the philosophical acceptability of the Angoff method, and propose an alternative method of standard setting based on how important it is for candidates to know the material each test item assesses, and not how difficult it is for a subgroup of candidates to answer each item. Methods: The practicalities of an alternative method of standard setting are evaluated here, for the first time, with direct comparison to an Angoff method. To negate bias due to any leading effects, a prospective cross-over design was adopted involving two groups of judges (n=7 and n=8), both of which set the standards for the same two 100 item multiple choice question tests, by the two different methods. Results: Overall, we found that the two methods took a similar amount of time to complete. The alternative method produced a higher cut-score (by 12-14%), and had a higher degree of variability between judges' cut-scores (by 5%). When using the alternative method, judges reported a small, but statistically significant, increase in their confidence to decide accurately the standard (by 3%). Conclusion: This is a new approach to standard setting where the quantitative differences are slight, but there are clear qualitative advantages associated with use of the alternative method.