Highly Sensitive Trait and Ectomorphism: Another Link on Creativity and Psychopathology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dear Editor: In a 2011 article1 published in The CJP, the author did not mention the pioneer work on creativity, introversion, and highly sensitive psychological traits introduced by Elaine N Aron and colleagues (see Aron and Aron2 and Aron et al3) from the late 1990s. These authors have not only found links on highly sensitive traits, introversion, higher sensory-processing sensitivity, and low brain latent inhibition,2,3 but also suggested that increased creativity and schizophrenia spectrum tendencies relate to highly sensitive people. Another apparent missing concept in Carson's1 manuscript regarding creativity is ectomorphism.4 Specifically, the ancient Eastern science of Ayurveda and the Western constitutional psychology relate the ectomorphic somatotype or vata4,5 with higher sensory-processing sensitivity, introversion, and creativity; whereas, people with an ectomorphic somatotype have a tendency to show symptoms of schizophrenia, depression, and a restless mind when they are out of balance.4,5 In this regard, Aron et al,3 Kagan and Snidman,6 and Herbener et al7 additionally showed that inhibited high reactive children were more likely to possess a tall, lean body mass, narrow face, and light blue eyes than uninhibited children. Therefore, the highly sensitive trait and ectomorphism are 2 additional candidates for vulnerability factors in the creativity and psychopathology model described by Carson.1 Moreover, recent neuropsychological studies demonstrating a link between temperament and neurophysiology are not directly mentioned in Carson's manuscript.1 In this sense, quantitative variables, such as sympathetic tone variations in the cardiovascular system,6 as well as sensory perception parameters, such as olfactory,7 trigeminal, tactile,8 and gustatory threshold and detection,9 are envisioned to detect new possible vulnerability or protective factors in the psychopathology model of creativity. We consider that the above-mentioned missing pieces in Carson's manuscript must be taken into account from now on in theoretical and practical grounds, to advance the field of human psychopathology and creativity. References 1. Carson SH. Creativity and psychopathology: a shared-vulnerability model. Can J Psychiatry. 2011;56(3):144-153. 2. Aron EN, Aron A. Sensory-processing sensitivity and its relation to introversion and emotionality. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1997;73(2):345-368. 3. Aron A, Ketay S, Hedden T, et al. Temperament trait of sensory processing sensitivity moderates cultural differences in neural response. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2010;5(2-3):219-226. 4. Rizzo-Sierra CV. Ayurvedic genomics, constitutional psychology and endocrinology: the missing connection. J Altern Complement Med. 2011;17(5);465-468. 5. Aggarwal S, Negi S, Jha P, et al. EGLNl involvement in high-altitude adaptation revealed through genetic analysis of extreme constitution types defined in Ayurveda. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107(44):18961-18966. 6. Kagan J, Snidman N. The long shadow of temperament. Washington (DC): US Library of Congress; 2004. 7. Herbener ES, Kagan J, Cohen, M. Shyness and olfactory threshold. Pers Individ Dif. 1989; 10(11 ):1159-1163. 8. Leon-Sarmiento FE, Hernandez HG, Schroeder ?. Abnormal tactile discrimination and somatosensory plasticity in familial primary hyperhidrosis. Neurosci Lett. 2008;441(3):332-334. 9. Croy I, Springborn M, Lotsch J, et al. Agreeable smellers and sensitive neurotics correlations among personality traits and sensory thresholds. PLoS One. 2011;6(4):e18701. Carlos V Rizzo-Sierra, PhD Fellow, Clinical Neuroscience Laboratory, Neuro-net, Ramon & Cajal Colombo-American Neuromedicai Foundation, Bogota, Colombia; Director, Unit of Innovation, NeuroVitaMed InnLtda, Bogota, Colombia. Maria C Duran, MD Researcher, CIRINEO, Neurorehabilitation Laboratory, Ramon & Cajal Colombo-American Neuromedical Foundation, Bogota, Colombia. …
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".