MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2625977274

Children’s Moral Emotions and Negative Emotionality: Predictors of Early-onset Antisocial Behaviour

2013· dissertation· en· W2625977274 on OpenAlexafffund
Tyler Colasante

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEmotionalityPsychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined links between antisocial behaviour, moral emotions (i.e., sympathy and guilt), and negative emotionality in an ethnically diverse sample of 4- and 8-year-old children (N = 79). Primary caregivers reported their children’s antisocial behaviour, sympathy, and negative emotionality through a questionnaire and across a 10-day span via daily diary entries (n = 474 records). In a semi-structured interview, children reported their sympathy levels and guilt feelings. Children with high guilt in harm contexts and low negative emotionality were rated as less antisocial in both questionnaire and diary reports. For children with low guilt in exclusion contexts, low sympathy ratings predicted higher questionnaire-reported antisocial behaviour. For children with high guilt in prosocial omission contexts, high sympathy ratings predicted lower diary-reported antisocial behaviour. Lastly, high sympathy ratings predicted lower questionnaire-reported antisocial behaviour for children with low negative emotionality.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)→Same topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development→French-language works237,207→