A meta-analysis of normal and disordered personality across the life span.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Debate continues about whether personality, both normal and disordered, can change significantly or is mainly stable across the life span. One issue that receives little attention is the degree to which personality stability coefficients may be influenced by attenuation due to measurement error. The current meta-analysis examines the data from recent research on personality stability, reporting both uncorrected and corrected stability coefficients. Attenuation due to measurement error was found to cause a significant reduction in personality stability coefficients, raising the possibility that some studies may conflate personality change with measurement error. Overall, corrected stability coefficients suggested that the stability of personality across adulthood is high, with only modest change. By contrast, personality during childhood is significantly more changeable. Both normal personality and personality disorders were highly stable across the life span, and patients in therapy experienced no more personality change than did nonpatients. Cross-cultural comparisons suggested relatively similar levels of personality stability cross-culturally, although personality stability among people in South Pacific nations is slightly lower than among those in the United States, Canada, or European nations.
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 | 0.010 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".