MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133059351 · doi:10.1177/0165025412472409

Moral emotion attributions and personality traits as long-term predictors of antisocial conduct in early adulthood

2013· article· en· W2133059351 on OpenAlexaff
Tobias Krettenauer, Jens B. Asendorpf, Gertrud Nunner‐Winkler

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Development · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersMax-Planck-GesellschaftVolkswagen Foundation
KeywordsPsychologyConscientiousnessAttributionAgreeablenessDevelopmental psychologyBig Five personality traitsPersonalityProsocial behaviorContext (archaeology)Antisocial personality disorderSocial psychologyPoison controlExtraversion and introversionInjury prevention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study investigated long-term relations between moral emotion attributions in childhood and adolescence and antisocial conduct in early adulthood while taking into account potentially confounding personality factors. Specifically, onset of prediction, unique and indirect effects of moral emotion attributions were examined. In a longitudinal study of 143 children (67 females), measures of moral emotion attributions, conscientiousness and agreeableness were obtained at the ages of 4–7, 11–12, 18 and 23 years. Antisocial conduct was assessed at the age of 23 years. Moral emotion attributions predicted antisocial behavior not before late adolescence. This effect was independent of conscientiousness and agreeableness. Moreover, moral emotion attributions indirectly contributed to the prediction of antisocial conduct by predicting change in conscientiousness. Overall, findings suggest that the emotions adolescents anticipate in the context of (im)moral actions contribute to development of antisocial conduct independently of personality traits.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Behavioral DevelopmentSame topicPersonality Traits and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207