Child and Adolescent Disposition Model: An Examination of the Temperament Factor Structure Within Early Childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lahey and Waldman proposed a temperament theory of conduct disorder (CD). Critical is the hypothesized temperament structure in which three relatively uncorrelated temperament dimensions (i.e., negative emotionality, daring, prosociality) central to CD are theorized to emerge in early childhood. The validity of this hypothesized factor structure in early childhood is unknown. The current study seeks to fill this gap by examining Lahey and Waldman's hypothesized temperament structure utilizing a Canadian sample ( n = 283) of preschoolers. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were performed to compare the hypothesized relatively uncorrelated temperament structure with two alternative models (i.e., correlated three-factor and single-factor structure). The CFA indicated that the temperament dimensions are present in early childhood and are relatively uncorrelated consistent with previous work at later developmental stages. Of importance, the findings highlighted key gender differences observable at 3 and 4 years of age. The theoretical implications 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".