MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Co‐development of internalizing and externalizing problem behaviors: Causal direction and common vulnerability

2011· article· en· W1981435422 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

VenueJournal of Adolescence · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyVulnerability (computing)Intervention (counseling)Latent growth modelingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Latent growth curve modeling was used to study the co-development of internalizing and externalizing problems in a sample of 2844 Korean fourth graders followed over four years. The project integrated two major theoretical viewpoints positing developmental mechanism: directional model and common vulnerability model. Findings suggest that (a) boys and girls follow different developmental trajectories in both domains in early adolescence; (b) bidirectional progression from initial levels of each domain to the developmental pattern of the other domain emerged among boys, while only unidirectional progression from externalizing to internalizing problem emerged among girls; and (c) all risk factors are not equally risky across domain and gender; parental violence was a common cross-domain risk factor for boys, whereas affiliation with delinquent friends was a common cross-domain risk factor for girls. Implications for future research and intervention were discussed.

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)0.001
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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.276 · 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