Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41639392›Full record

ArticleCommunications psychology2026

Language-based assessments can predict psychological and subjective well-being.

Steven Mesquiti, Danielle Cosme, Erik C Nook, Emily B Falk, Shannon Burns

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Steven MesquitiDepartment of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA. sm9518@princeton.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1687-1137
Danielle CosmeAnnenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8956-4053
Erik C NookDepartment of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7967-0792
Emily B FalkAnnenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, PA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6383-1846
Shannon BurnsDepartment of Psychological Science, Pomona College, Claremont, CA, USA. shannon.burns@pomona.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8953-2406

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Well-being is commonly defined in terms of comfort, happiness, functioning, and flourishing. Scholars distinguish between subjective well-being (i.e., perceiving life as pleasant) and psychological well-being (i.e., perceiving life as meaningful). While advances in natural language processing have enabled automated assessments of subjective well-being from language, their ability to capture psychological well-being remains underexplored. Across three studies (one preregistered), we examined how well language-based models predict self-reported subjective and psychological well-being. Participants provided verbal or written responses about their satisfaction with life and autonomy, along with standard questionnaire measures. We used contextual word embeddings from transformer-based models to predict well-being scores. Language-based predictions correlated moderately with questionnaire measures of both constructs (rs = .16-.63) and generalized across well-being domains (rs = .15-.50), though these associations were weaker than previously work (rs = .72-.85). Autonomy was consistently less predictable than satisfaction with life. Comparisons with GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 revealed that both models outperformed BERT in predicting satisfaction with life (r = .71 and .75) and modestly improved predictions of autonomy (r

Identifiers

PMID41639392
PMCPMC12913933

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.