The development of impulsivity, fearfulness, and helpfulness during childhood: patterns of consistency and change in the trajectories of boys and girls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of the present study was to describe the development of boys and girls during the elementary-school years on three dimensions that conceptually and empirically represent risk for maladjustment. METHOD: Every year between kindergarten and grade six, teachers rated the impulsivity, fearfulness, and helpfulness dimensions among a sample of 1,865 children representative of kindergarten boys and girls in the province of Quebec (Canada) in 1986-87. A group-based trajectory method was used to 1) identify groups of boys and girls following distinct-level trajectories of behaviours (on each dimension) during the elementary-school years; 2) estimate the proportion of children in each of the identified trajectory groups; and 3) estimate the patterns of consistency and variations in trajectories. RESULTS: The results indicated that the best models comprised three distinct-level trajectory groups on fearfulness and helpfulness (a low, moderate, and high group) and four distinct-level trajectory groups on impulsivity. The helpfulness and fearfulness trajectory groups were generally more stable than the impulsivity groups. The broad patterns of development were similar across sexes. However, there were more boys on the higher impulsivity trajectories and low helpfulness trajectory, while there were more girls on the high fearfulness trajectory. CONCLUSION: We found that behavioural consistency over middle childhood varied across trajectory groups and across dimensions, and we identified sex differences in the distribution of children in the different trajectory groups that may reflect gender-specific risks for psychopathology.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".