MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317183388 · doi:10.1017/thg.2013.19

A Behavioral Genetic Analysis of Alexithymia and the Dark Triad Traits of Personality

2013· article· en· W2317183388 on OpenAlexaffabout
Molly Cairncross, Livia Veselka, Julie Aitken Schermer, Philip A. Vernon

Bibliographic record

VenueTwin Research and Human Genetics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDark triadAlexithymiaPsychopathyMachiavellianismPsychologyBig Five personality traitsNarcissismPersonalityAntisocial personality disorderClinical psychologyToronto Alexithymia ScaleBehavioural geneticsDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPoison controlMedicineInjury prevention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study is the first to assess phenotypic correlations between alexithymia and the Dark Triad traits of personality in a community sample, as well as the common genetic and environmental factors underlying these correlations. Participants were 232 North American adult twin pairs who completed the Narcissistic Personality Inventory, the Self-Report Psychopathy Scale, the MACH-IV, and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale. Results revealed that alexithymia correlates significantly and positively with psychopathy and Machiavellianism, and negatively with narcissism. Subsequent bivariate behavioral genetic analysis demonstrated that these phenotypic correlations were primarily attributable to common genetic and common non-shared environmental factors. The implication of these findings regarding the maladaptive functions of alexithymia within the antisocial realm of behavior and the need for replication are 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations44
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTwin Research and Human GeneticsSame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207