Shyness <i>and</i> Sociability Beyond Emerging Adulthood: Implications for Understanding the Developmental Sequelae of Shyness Subtypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emerging evidence suggests that conflicted shyness (combination of shyness and sociability) places individuals at risk for maladjustment in childhood, adolescence, and emerging adulthood. However, it is not known (1) if this risk for maladjustment persists into adulthood, (2) the extent to which it is generalizable to a broad range of adaptive domains, and (3) if there are mechanisms that might underlie the link between the conflicted shyness phenotype and domains of functioning. Here, we find that the combination of shyness and sociability (i.e., conflicted shyness) places individuals in their thirties at the greatest risk for poor functioning across demographic, health, interpersonal, and psychological domains above and beyond shyness alone. We also report that attention and loneliness may be factors that underlie the risk for poor mental health in individuals characterized by conflicted shyness. Our findings extend work on conflicted shyness by considering several domains of functioning beyond emerging adulthood and suggest possible mechanisms linking this phenotype with symptoms of psychopathology. Findings suggest that the conflicted shyness subtype may be associated with negative consequences across various domains of functioning and across developmental periods at least until the fourth decade of life.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".