Spouse similarity for antisocial behaviour in the general population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In contrast with the large amount of research on the familial transmission of antisocial behaviour, few studies have investigated similarity between spouses for such behaviour. In addition, none of these studies have examined child conduct disorder (CCD) and adult antisocial behaviour (AAB) separately. METHOD: We studied 519 pairs of spouses who completed the Diagnostic Interview Schedule. In each pair, one spouse belonged to a random subsample of persons who had participated in a large population survey and was re-interviewed. Association between spouses for lifetime symptoms and DSM-III criteria of CCD, AAB, antisocial personality disorder and co-morbid psychiatric diagnoses was examined with bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: We observed a moderate association between spouses for the presence of CCD (OR = 4.02, 95% CI = 2.03-7.96), and a strong association for the presence of AAB (OR = 20.1, 95 % CI = 5.97-67.5). This similarity for AAB was independent of the similarity for CCD and persisted after adjustment for spousal similarity for disorders co-morbid with AAB. An examination of the relationship between marital status and the presence of CCD and/or AAB in the general population sample (from which originated our sample of couples) suggested that the spousal similarity for AAB was more likely attributable to assortative mating rather than marital contamination. CONCLUSION: Our finding of a strong similarity between spouses for AAB has significant implications for both clinicians and researchers. It also suggests that adult antisocial behaviour should be considered as a distinct diagnostic entity, an approach which diverges from DSM-IV diagnostic criteria.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".