MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167346560 · doi:10.1017/s0954579409990149

Reactivity and distortions in the self: Narcissism, types of aggression, and the functioning of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis during early adolescence

2009· article· en· W2167346560 on OpenAlexafffund
William M. Bukowski, Alex E. Schwartzman, Jonathan B. Santo, Catherine L. Bagwell, Ryan Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment and Psychopathology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsNarcissismPsychologyAggressionPsychopathyDevelopmental psychologyHypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axisReactivity (psychology)Clinical psychologyEndocrinologyPersonalityHormonePsychoanalysisMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A multisample, multistudy project aimed at understanding how individual differences in narcissism during early adolescence are related to distortions in the aggression, and the reactivity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis to negative and positive experiences. The findings indicate that individual differences in narcissism are a remarkably stable aspect of personality during early adolescence. It is predictably related to an inflated view of the self that is not warranted by objective indices of social functioning. Further evidence shows that it promotes the continuity of aggressive behavior and is more strongly related to reactive aggression than to proactive aggression and more strongly related to relational aggression than to physical aggression. Finally, there is evidence that distortions in the self may derive from the inadequate functioning of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, one of the body's main response system for dealing with stress. These findings are discussed in terms of the processes by which early adolescents react to threats and arousal in their daily functioning.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopment and PsychopathologySame topicBullying, Victimization, and AggressionFrench-language works237,207