Sex differences in the development of physical aggression: An intergenerational perspective and implications for preventive interventions
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article reviews the state of knowledge on the development of chronic physical aggression (CPA), with the aim of identifying the most effective prevention strategies. We specifically focus on the early development of physical aggression, on sex differences in the use of physical aggression, and on the transmission of behavior problems from one generation to the other. The body of research on the development of CPA from the past three decades that we review shows increasing evidence that its prevention requires a long-term biopsychosocial developmental approach which also must include an intergenerational perspective. Recent genetic and epigenetic research has indicated that there are both important genetic and environmental effects on gene expression which start at conception. We conclude that one of the most effective strategies to break the intergenerational transmission of CPA involves giving long-term support to pregnant women with a history of behavior problems, their spouse, and their offspring.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it