Developmental Trajectories of Oppositional Behavior during Elementary School and Their Risk Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oppositional and defiant behavior (ODB) problems are among the most important behavior problems in school children. Understanding their trajectories during elementary school and conditional risk factors at school entry is essential for implementing effective preventive and corrective interventions. Behavior problems of a population sample (958 boys, 971 girls) attending public schools were assessed annually by teachers. Three groups were identified: High Opposition (HO; 14.5%), Moderate Opposition (MO; 37.5%), and Low Opposition (LO; 48.0%). Children on the HO trajectory were found to be different from those on the MO and LO trajectories for numerous kindergarten risk factors: a) they tended to be boys with high family adversity; b) their mothers reported low warmth and high control; c) teachers rated them high on physical aggression, opposition, hyperactivity and low anxiety. Children who are likely to have chronic ODB throughout the elementary school years can be identified in kindergarten. Preventive interventions at school entry could probably help these children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".