MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077339660 · doi:10.1080/02673843.2008.9748008

Personality Traits, Music Preferences and Depression in Adolescence

2008· article· en· W2077339660 on OpenAlexaff
Dave Miranda, Michel Claes

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Adolescence and Youth · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyNeuroticismPersonalityModerationOpenness to experienceBig Five personality traitsDepression (economics)Developmental psychologyClinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This six-month longitudinal study was conducted with 311 adolescents and verifies: (1) if music preferences can predict depression; (2) if personality traits can predict music preferences; (3) if music listening can represent a protective factor against depression. Results indicate that Soul music listening (e.g., hip hop, R&B) is a predictor of lower depression levels in adolescent girls. Personality dimensions from the Big Five reveal various predictive relations with music preferences, for instance Openness predicts music eclecticism. Soul music listening is a moderator of the predictive relationship between Neuroticism and depression levels in adolescent girls, thus pointing to a possible protective effect. Research paths for studies on music and adolescent development, personality traits, and evolutionary psychology are succinctly discussed.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations37
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Adolescence and YouthSame topicNeuroscience and Music PerceptionFrench-language works237,207