MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098853760 · doi:10.1159/000216541

Individual Differences in Behavioral, Physiological, and Genetic Sensitivities to Contexts: Implications for Development and Adaptation

2009· review· en· W2098853760 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Neuroscience · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsLearning PartnershipUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDevelopmental psychologyPsychologyAdaptation (eye)Reactivity (psychology)NeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although exposure to adversity places children at high risk for developmental problems, there is considerable variation in the adaptation of children exposed to both low and high levels of adversity. In recent years, researchers have made significant progress in understanding how social environments shape children's development. Studies indicate that not all children are equally susceptible to environmental effects. In this article, we review the studies that examine individuals' sensitivity to both positive and negative contextual influences at three levels of analysis: behavioral, physiological, and genetic. Furthermore, we examine how these different types of sensitivities may be related and whether early exposure to adversity plays an important role in shaping development of individual reactivity to contexts. We also suggest important directions for future studies of individual differences in susceptibility to environmental effects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.227
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.156 · 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