MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195937277 · doi:10.1002/ab.21990

Dark or disturbed?: Predicting aggression from the Dark Tetrad and schizotypy

2021· article· en· W3195937277 on OpenAlexafffund
Delroy L. Paulhus, Rohin Gupta, Daniel N. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueAggressive Behavior · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSchizotypyPsychopathyPsychologyAggressionTetradPersonalityMachiavellianismBig Five personality traitsNarcissismDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on the personality foundations of aggression typically implicates either (a) aspects of the so-called "Dark Tetrad" or (b) severe mental disturbance (psychosis). The appearance of psychotic symptoms in general populations is termed schizotypy. We conducted two studies to compare the effects of dark personalities and schizotypy on aggression. Study 1 used standard inventories to investigate the overlap of Dark Tetrad traits with schizotypy in a sample of 977 undergraduates. All tetrad traits except narcissism were positively associated with schizotypy, but only at moderate levels. Study 2 administered the same personality battery to 303 members of an online community sample: Aggression outcomes were measured with both self-reports and a behavioral measure-the Voodoo Doll Task. Regression analyses determined the unique contributions of the five personality variables. Two dark traits-psychopathy and sadism-were strong predictors of self-report aggression. Schizotypy added incrementally to the Dark Tetrad in predicting both self-report and behaviorally measured aggression.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations31
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAggressive BehaviorSame topicPersonality Traits and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207