Onset of antisocial behavior, affiliation with deviant friends, and childhood maladjustment: A test of the childhood- and adolescent-onset models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predictors and concurrent correlates of childhood-onset and adolescent-onset antisocial behavior were studied in a sample of 165 boys and 151 girls, followed from age 6 to age 15. An integrated general growth mixture model was used to determine the number and shape of developmental trajectories of antisocial behavior exhibited by boys and girls. Associations of these trajectories with trajectories of attention-deficit/hyperactivity (ADH) problems and deviant peer affiliation were examined. A childhood-onset, an adolescent-onset, and a low antisocial behavior trajectory were identified. A minority of the sample (11%), mostly males, followed the childhood-onset trajectory. This trajectory was predicted by prior membership in the high ADH trajectory in childhood. The adolescent-onset trajectory (46%) was associated with increases in friends' antisocial behavior but not with ADH problems. Most females (60%) followed the low antisocial trajectory. A substantial proportion of females, however, followed the childhood (5%) and adolescent-onset trajectories (35%). The male-female ratios in the childhood and adolescent-onset trajectories were similar. The results largely supported theories that distinguish between childhood and adolescent onsets of antisocial behavior, but they did not suggest that boys and girls differ in the age of onset of antisocial behavior.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".