MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967750853 · doi:10.1002/imhj.20015

Decade of Behavior Distinguished Lecture: Development of physical aggression during infancy

2004· article· en· W1967750853 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInfant Mental Health Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAggressionPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPhysical developmentEarly adulthoodYoung adult

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Violence is a major public concern in our modern societies. To prevent this violence we need to understand how innocent children grow into violent adolescents and adults. It is generally believed that humans are most frequently physically aggressive during adolescence and early adulthood. With longitudinal studies of large samples of children from different countries that followed them from infancy to adulthood, scientists tried to discover at what age individuals learn how to physically aggress. These studies indicated that the peak age for physical aggression was not during early adulthood, adolescence, or even kindergarten, but rather between 24 and 42 months after birth. Although there are important individual differences in children's use of physical aggression, most of them will learn to use socially acceptable alternatives when angry or frustrated before they enter school. To prevent chronic physical aggression and its terrible consequences over the whole life course, modern societies should provide children with the optimal prenatal and postnatal environments.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.358
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.358 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it