Neuropsychological Performance, IQ, Personality, and Grades in a Longitudinal Grade-School Male Sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assessed the statistical relationship between neuropsychological performance, IQ and personality test results and school grades in a longitudinal sample of adolescent males. One-hundred and forty-eight boys completed six years of WISC-R short forms (Block Design and Vocabulary) and provided six years of math and language grades and grade failure data while in elementary school. In junior high school, the same boys completed an extensive neuropsychological test battery and the NEO-PI-R, a standard big five personality trait measure. Neuropsychological test scores were more powerfully associated with grades than were IQ scores, despite their later and single administration. In addition, hierarchical regression analysis demonstrated that three of four neuropsychological test score factors (Verbal Learning, Executive Function, and Tactile Laterality improved the statistical association with six-year averaged failure-weighted grades over and above IQ (averaged Vocabulary and Block Design). NEO-PI-R Agreeableness was significantly and positively related to grades, over and above both IQ and neuropsychological function.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".