MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Behavioral Genetics of Personality Disorder

2008· review· en· W2118641033 on OpenAlexaff
W. John Livesley, Kerry L. Jang

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Clinical Psychology · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonalityPsychologyBehavioural geneticsContext (archaeology)Personality disordersBig Five personality traitsClinical psychologyNature versus nurtureDevelopmental psychologyGeneticsSocial psychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Behavioral genetics research has opened a new window on understanding personality disorder. The earliest studies were focused on establishing the relative contributions of genes and the environment in these disorders. Although these studies provided solid evidence of the importance of genetic and environmental influences on personality disorder and showed that all aspects of personality disorder are subject to genetic influence, heritability studies are limited because they are not helpful in explicating causal mechanisms. More recent research has focused on the relative contributions of the covariation of personality disorder diagnoses and traits, which allows one to examine etiological relationships. These developments are leading to major changes in ideas about what constitutes the environment and nature of the interplay between genes and environment. The present review examines major themes in this growing body of research in the context of current issues in the personality disorders.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.288
GPT teacher head0.603
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations70
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Clinical PsychologySame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207