Searching for a developmental typology of personality and its relations to antisocial behaviour: a longitudinal study of an adjudicated men sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The search for an empirically based personality typology has regained the interest of researchers. To date, however, empirical inquiries have mainly been cross-sectional. In this study, an empirically based developmental typology of personality was identified using data from a prospective longitudinal study of a sample of men adjudicated during their adolescence and assessed on four occasions until midlife. Cluster analyses were performed on measures of disinhibition, negative emotionality, and extraversion. Four developmental types of personality were identified. The first was characterized by average scores in the three traits in adolescence that decreased linearly until midlife (39%). The second type displayed very high scores in disinhibition and negative emotionality in adolescence that decreased rapidly during early adulthood (24%). The third type was characterized by very high scores in disinhibition and negative emotionality that remained stable until midlife, while extraversion was average during adolescence and then decreased rapidly until midlife (17%). The fourth type was characterized by high scores in disinhibition and negative emotionality in adolescence that was followed by cycles of decreases and increases until midlife (20%). These four developmental types of personality seemed to be related to known antisocial behaviour trajectories.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".