MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884242862 · doi:10.1111/ejn.14083

Toward an integrative perspective on the neural mechanisms underlying persistent maladaptive behaviors

2018· article· en· W2884242862 on OpenAlexaff
María M. Diehl, Karolina M. Lempert, Ashley C. Parr, Ian C. Ballard, Vaughn R. Steele, David V. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neuroscience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute on Drug AbuseUniversity of Rochester
KeywordsMiamiPsychologyHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A host of public health problems -- from drug addiction to obesity -- are associated with persistent, maladaptive behaviors. The underlying causes of such behaviors have received considerable attention from psychologists, clinicians, computational theorists, and neuroscientists. These diverse perspectives were showcased in a symposium at the University of Rochester entitled Persistent, Maladaptive Behaviors: Why We Make Bad Choices. Here, we synthesize novel findings and perspectives arising from the symposium and integrate those findings within the broader literature. We begin by reviewing theoretical models of maladaptive behaviors and their underlying neural circuitry. We then discuss the behavioral and clinical manifestations of maladaptive behaviors. Given the multifaceted nature of maladaptive behavior, we argue that a dimensional approach may help inform theoretical models and clinical interventions, particularly those that rely on brain stimulation to induce neuro-plastic changes that rescue and remediate aberrant neural responses. We conclude that an interdisciplinary approach to studying maladaptive behavior will help advance the field toward improved prevention, diagnosis, and treatment.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.010
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207