Adult Retrospective Reports of Externalizing Behavior: Distinct Dimensions and Key Associations for Past Conduct Disorder Ratings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies have examined the correlates and factor structure of the conduct disorder (CD) criteria in child and adolescent samples, finding that the set of behaviors defining CD are heterogeneous in nature. However, the factor structure of the CD criteria has not been examined in adults, even though the CD criteria often must be assessed retrospectively when diagnosing antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) in adulthood. To advance understanding of assessing CD behaviors retrospectively in adults, we present factor analytic and correlational results from a large sample of adult outpatients (N = 1,793). Our results indicate that CD ratings are defined by at least two latent factors of Rule Violation (e.g., curfew violations) and Aggression (e.g., using a weapon). Ratings of aggressive behaviors tended to show somewhat stronger associations with other externalizing psychopathology than did rule violation ratings. Furthermore, CD dimensions identified in our factor analyses correlated robustly with ASPD but correlated just as strongly with diagnostic ratings of other externalizing psychopathology such as substance use history. We discuss how these findings from a large adult sample parallel results from child and adolescent samples indicating that the CD criteria are defined by distinct dimensions. Furthermore, we interpret these findings within the context of other recent studies suggesting that a CD history may not be a specific precursor to ASPD in 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".