MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999597888 · doi:10.1348/000712608x337788

Are autistic traits autistic?

2008· article· en· W1999597888 on OpenAlexaff
Élise B. Barbeau, Adrianna Mendrek, Laurent Mottron

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Psychology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSexual Differentiation and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital Rivière-des-Prairies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutismPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyAutistic traitsBrain asymmetrySexual dimorphismTypically developingDevelopmental disorderLateralityConstruct (python library)Lateralization of brain functionCognitive psychologyAutism spectrum disorder

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the extreme male brain theory of autism (Baron-Cohen, 2002), autistic traits would be extreme manifestations of typical male behaviours. The Auyeung et al. (2009) paper establishes a link between autistic traits and higher fetal testosterone (fT) levels in typically developing children. We argue that the construct behind this relationship needs further investigation. First, the link between fT levels and sexually dimorphic traits, that are for example, associated with empathizing and systemizing, is controversial. Likewise, describing autistic behaviours as being extreme male-like is debatable. The cerebral hemisphere laterality pattern of individuals with autism also seems to differ from the pattern typically observed in males. Moreover, the parallel that should exist, according to the fT theory, between individuals with autism and individuals with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), because of their high fT levels, is unclear. The theory implying fT levels in autism fails to account for a big part of autism, and the link between fT and normal 'autistic traits' hardly demonstrates the causal link between fT and autism.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.304
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of PsychologySame topicSexual Differentiation and DisordersFrench-language works237,207