Combined Effects of Neuroticism and Extraversion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neuroticism and extraversion are potentially important markers of personality vulnerability to suicide. Whereas previous studies have examined these traits independently, we examined their combined effects. Data were collected from family members and/or friends of individuals 18 years or older who died by suicide (n = 64) in rural China and from age-, sex-, and geographically matched controls (n = 64). Personality was assessed with the NEO-Five Factor Inventory. Individuals with a personality style characterized by high neuroticism and low extraversion were at 3.07 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.44-6.55) times greater risk for suicide than were individuals without this personality style; in contrast, a style characterized by low neuroticism and high extraversion conferred decreased suicide risk (odds ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 1.44-6.55). We conclude that it may be clinically inadequate to conceptualize neuroticism, by itself, as a risk marker for suicide. However, when the negative affect characteristic of neuroticism is combined with the joylessness, pessimism, and hopelessness characteristic of low extraversion, risk for suicide is elevated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".