Visual P3 amplitude and self‐reported psychopathic personality traits: Frontal reduction is associated with self‐centered impulsivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Past studies have examined P3 amplitude as an index of cognitive function related to psychopathy with mixed results. Psychopathy is a heterogeneous set of dissociable traits, and no previous study has examined relationships between P3 and specific traits. A Two Process Theory (TPT) of psychopathy has recently been advanced predicting that P3 reductions are related to only one dimension. We evaluated the relationship between P3 and the two factors of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) in 96 undergraduates who performed a visual task. One factor of the PPI, Self-Centered Impulsivity, is related to the dimension of the TPT predicted to underlie P3 reduction. Frontal amplitude reduction was uniquely and inversely related to this trait. The other PPI factor, Fearless Dominance, was associated with faster reaction times. Future work on psychopathic personality and P3 should evaluate whether relationships are unique to one personality dimension.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".