MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753569319 · doi:10.1177/2167696817725608

Adverse Childhood Experiences and Development in Emerging Adulthood

2017· article· en· W2753569319 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerging Adulthood · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicIdentity, Memory, and Therapy
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdverse Childhood ExperiencesPsychologyFeelingDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyMental healthSocial psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To date, no study has investigated the relation of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) with the developmental identification of the dimensions of emerging adulthood (IDEA; e.g., identity development, experimentation). Participants ( N = 832) were recruited from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (version: ‘2014 - 08- 15'). Basic associations between ACEs and the IDEA were conducted as well as indirect effects between ACEs and the IDEA for endorsement of traditional adult roles and current stress. ACEs were associated with reporting lower scores on the IDEA. Specifically, higher ACEs were associated with feeling less self-focused and less likely to feel this period of life is a time of experimentation and possibilities. Conversely, higher ACEs scores were associated with increased negativity/instability. Current perceived stress fully and partially mediated the effect between ACEs and IDEA Scales. As posited by Arnett, ACEs was associated with decreased IDEA scores. Current perceived stress may be a salient mechanism between ACEs and developmental dimensions of emerging adulthood.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.296 · 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