MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135547416 · doi:10.5779/hypothesis.v11i1.326

The Origin of Personality types developed under selective pressures: Introducing Climatic-Adaptation Theory

2013· article· en· W2135547416 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHypothesis · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraditional Chinese Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)PersonalityPsychologyPersonality theoryCognitive psychologyComputer scienceSocial psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classification of different char - acteristics of individuals is a longstand- ing debate in the study of personality type. Although classified personality types among temperament theories in Western and Oriental medicine share similar char- acteristics, understanding their relation- ship is limited both by difficulty in scientif- ic approach and by a lack of explanation for the personality types that can encom- pass these theories. In this study, we sug- gest inherent personal traits and individual differences based on selective pressures. Personality types adapted to different cli- mate zones are proposed and are com- pared to temperament theories. INTRODUCTION Traditional Western and Oriental medicine have attempted to cat- egorize people into different personality types through theoretical concepts such as Ayurveda, traditional Chinese medi- cine, the four temperaments theory, and four-constitution medicine 1-3 . Although various theories have been proposed over the centuries, they share a similar fundamental attitude that humans have a connection to nature. In addition, the characteristics of each personality type have many commonalities among theo- ries regardless of culture 4-5 . Studies us- ing psychological assessments have also shown similarities between catego- rized individuals and personality types through temperament theories 3,6 . These facts suggest that traditional tempera- ment theories do not provide arbitrary categorizations of personality character- istics; rather, they may provide specific conditions for differentiating personality types. Since Charles Darwin's theory of evolu- tion by natural selection, modern humans have been understood as the result of evolution from a common ancestor 7 . Genetic and archaeological evidence has shed light on the history of human settlement in the Late Pleistocene 8-9 . As modern humans spread over the globe from Africa, adaptation due to natural selection in different environments, es- pecially climate conditions, played an important role in human survival 10 . Therefore, different personality types can be understood as resulting from adap- tations to different environmental con- ditions throughout the history of human settlement. In this study, we introduce a theory of the origin of personality types. This theory is based on the hypothesis that the migra- tion of humans and their adaptation to various climate zones led to the forma- tion of different personality types. This study aims to explain the traits of person- ality types based on adaptation to differ- ent climate zones and to compare these adaptive traits with the personality char- acteristics of temperament theories. In the next section, we explain the theory of climate adaptation. We then compare it with the temperament theories and lastly discuss the present work.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.758
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.224 · 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