Sub-optimal parenting is associated with schizotypic and anxiety personality traits in adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Part of the variation in personality characteristics has been attributed to the child-parent interaction and sub-optimal parenting has been associated with psychiatric morbidity. In the present study, an extensive battery of personality scales (Trait Anxiety Inventory, Behavioural Inhibition/Activation System questionnaire, Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised, Temperament and Character Inventory, Schizotypal Traits Questionnaire, Toronto Alexithymia Scale) and the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) were administered in 324 adult healthy males to elucidate the effects of parenting on personality configuration. Personality variables were analysed using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and the factors "Schizotypy", "Anxiety", "Behavioural activation", "Novelty seeking" and "Reward dependence" were extracted. Associations between personality factors with PBI "care" and "overprotection" scores were examined with regression analyses. Subjects were divided into "parental style" groups and personality factors were subjected to categorical analyses. "Schizotypy" and "Anxiety" were significantly predicted by high maternal overprotection and low paternal care. In addition, the Affectionless control group (low care/high overprotection) had higher "Schizotypy" and "Anxiety" compared with the Optimal Parenting group (high care/low overprotection). These results further validate sub-optimal parenting as an important environmental exposure and extend our understanding on the mechanisms by which it increases risk for psychiatric morbidity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".