Developmental origins of chronic physical aggression: An international perspective on using singletons, twins and epigenetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article takes an international and historical perspective to discuss the present state of knowledge on the developmental origins of physical aggression and its implications for the prevention of chronic physical aggression. An increasing number of longitudinal studies of singleton and twins initiated at birth or during the first few years of life are showing that physical aggressions are more frequent in early childhood than at any other time during the life-span. Because chronic physical aggression generally starts in early childhood, preventive interventions during this period are much more likely to be effective and substantially decrease the costs of criminal behavior during adolescence and early adulthood. Unfortunately, most criminological studies on physical aggression development and prevention target the adolescent and adulthood periods and do not take into account gene–environment contributions. Early childhood studies are needed to identify early bio-psycho-social mechanisms that put individuals on a chronic trajectory of physical aggression from early childhood to adulthood. These studies can also help identify the preventive interventions that are most effective in preventing a life-course of crime and misery. Developmental criminology needs to take a bio-psycho-social intergenerational and life-span perspective as well as focus more systematically on females as the key target for intergenerational prevention of chronic physical aggression.
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 | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".