MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006206633 · doi:10.1002/bsl.715

The relation of psychopathy to concurrent aggression and antisocial behavior in high‐risk adolescent girls and boys

2006· article· en· W2006206633 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie R. Penney, Marlene M. Moretti

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Sciences & the Law · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychopathyAggressionPsychologyEmpathyDevelopmental psychologyAffect (linguistics)Poison controlInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsJuvenile delinquencyInterpersonal relationshipClinical psychologyPersonalitySocial psychologyMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study examined the concurrent relationship between psychopathy characteristics as measured by the PCL:YV and aggressive and antisocial behavior in a sample of 142 high-risk adolescent girls and boys. The unique relationship between each of three PCL:YV factors (Arrogant and Deceitful Interpersonal Style, Deficient Affective Experience, and Impulsive and Irresponsible Behavioral Style) and outcomes was evaluated to determine which aspects of psychopathy are most crucially linked to aggressive and antisocial behavior in adolescents. Dependent measures were expanded to include both relational and physical forms of aggression to better capture meaningful outcomes for girls and boys. Regression analyses showed that the relationships between psychopathic features and outcomes were equivalent for boys and girls, and that deficits in affect were most consistently associated with aggression. These findings are concordant with the well established finding in developmental research showing that deficits in empathy and affect regulation are associated with aggression.

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 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 score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.661

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations82
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral Sciences & the LawSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207