Youth Aggressive/Disruptive Behavior Trajectories and Subsequent Gambling Among Urban Male Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the association between aggressive/disruptive behavior development in two distinct developmental periods-childhood (i.e., Grades 1-3) and early adolescence (i.e., Grades 6-10)-and subsequent gambling behavior in late adolescence up to age 20. The sample consists of 310 urban males of predominately minority and low socioeconomic status followed from first grade to late adolescence. Separate general growth mixture models were estimated to explore the heterogeneity in aggressive/disruptive behavior development in the aforementioned two periods. Three distinct behavior trajectories were identified for each period: a chronic high, a moderate increasing, and a low increasing class for childhood, and a chronic high, a moderate increasing, followed by decreasing and a low stable class for early adolescence. There was no association between childhood behavior trajectories and gambling involvement. Males with a moderate behavior trajectory in adolescence where two times more likely to gamble compared to those in the low stable class (OR = 1.89, 95% CI = 1.11, 3.24). Those with chronic high trajectories during either childhood or early adolescence (OR = 2.60, 95% CI = 1.06, 6.38; OR = 3.19, 95% CI = 1.18, 8.64, respectively) were more likely to be at-risk/problem gamblers than those in the low class. Aggressive/disruptive behavior development in childhood and early adolescence is associated with gambling and gambling problems in late adolescence among urban male youth. Preventing childhood and youth aggressive/disruptive behavior may be effective to prevent youth problem gambling.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".