The gene environment aetiology of freezing and its relationship with internalizing symptoms during adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The freezing response is a universal response to threat, linked to attentive immobility and action preparation. It is relevant for acute stress coping in animals and humans, and subtle deviations in toddler freezing duration (absence of, or excessively long reactions) have been linked to higher risk for internalizing symptoms in adolescence. Yet, while individual freezing tendencies are relatively stable throughout life, little is known about their gene-environment aetiology. METHODS: We investigated the heritability of toddler freezing in the Quebec Newborn Twin Study (QNTS; n=508 twins) by fitting behavioural genetic models to video-coded freezing responses during a robot confrontation. Furthermore, we examined the predictive associations between toddler freezing and internalizing symptoms (anxiety and depressive symptoms), as they unfold during adolescence (ages 12-19 years) using linear mixed-effects models. FINDINGS: Freezing was found to be moderately heritable (45% of the variance accounted for by genetic factors). The remaining variance was explained by unique environmental factors, including measurement error. No significant contribution of shared environmental factors was noted. Additionally, shorter freezing was associated with more internalizing symptoms in adolescence at trend level, a pattern that was significant for depressive but not anxiety symptoms. INTERPRETATION: Freezing is an adaptive coping mechanism in early childhood, which is partly driven by genetic factors. Crucially, the absence or shorter duration of these behaviours may signal vulnerability to depressive problems later in life. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Research Fund of Quebec-Health and Society and Culture. Consolidator grant from the European Research Council (ERC_CoG-2017_772337).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".