Research review: A critical review of studies on the developmental trajectories of antisocial behavior in females
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Knowledge on the onset and the development of antisocial behavior in females is limited, because most of the research in this domain is based on males. METHODS: We critically reviewed 46 empirical studies that examined developmental trajectories of antisocial behavior in females, notably to help determine whether or not an early-onset/life-course-persistent trajectory exists in females. RESULTS: The review suggested that antisocial behavior in females can follow different developmental trajectories (e.g., early-onset/life-course-persistent, childhood-limited, adolescence-limited, adolescence-delayed-onset, adulthood-onset). However, many of the studies reviewed were limited by factors such as the use of global measures of antisocial behavior, the identification of the trajectories based on threshold criteria, and the small sample sizes. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies should take into account the shortcomings highlighted in this review. Such studies are needed to improve the understanding and prevention of the development of antisocial behavior in females.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it