Biological sensitivity to context moderates the effects of the early teacher–child relationship on the development of mental health by adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The moderating effects of biological sensitivity to context (physiological and behavioral stress reactivity) on the association between the early teacher-child relationship and the development of adolescent mental health problems were examined in a community sample of 96 children. Grade 1 measures of biological sensitivity to context included physiological (i.e., slope of mean arterial pressure across a 20- to 30-min stress protocol) and behavioral (i.e., temperamental inhibition/disinhibition) markers. Grade 1 measures of the teacher-child relationship included positive (i.e., closeness) and negative (i.e., conflict) qualities. Mental health symptoms were assessed at Grades 1 and 7. Results of a multiple regression analysis indicated substantial association of the teacher-child relationship with the development of adolescent mental health symptoms, especially for more reactive children. In addition to teacher-child relationship main effects, all four Reactivity x Teacher-Child Relationship interaction terms were statistically significant when controlling for Grade 1 symptom severity, suggesting that both physiological and behavioral reactivity moderate the association of both adverse and supportive aspects of the teacher-child relationship with Grade 7 symptom severity over and above Grade 1 severity. There were important differences, depending on which stress reactivity measure was considered. The importance of these findings for recent theoretical arguments regarding biological sensitivity to context and differential susceptibility is discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".