Trajectories of frontal brain activity and socio‐emotional development in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Asymmetric frontal brain activity is thought to reflect individual differences in approach‐ and avoidance‐oriented motivation and emotional experience. Using a prospective longitudinal design, the authors investigated whether trajectories of frontal electroencephalogram (EEG) asymmetry in children (Mage = 6.39 years at enrollment) predicted subjective, behavioral, and autonomic indices of socioemotional processes. Resting frontal EEG activity was measured across four separate repeated assessments spanning approximately 2 years. Children's EEG asymmetry across assessments was best characterized by two trajectories: a stable right frontal asymmetry class (48.65%), and a stable left frontal asymmetry class (51.35%). At visit 4, children in the stable right frontal asymmetry displayed more avoidance‐related tendencies and children in the stable left frontal asymmetry class exhibited more approach‐related tendencies across social, emotional, and autonomic measures. These findings suggest that developmental patterns of resting frontal brain activity across the early school years may underlie approach‐ and avoidance‐related motivation and predict socio‐emotional processes in some children.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".